By John Vibes
A recent report published by The New York Times has pointed out that an overwhelming majority of Americans, 91% of them in fact, did not support or vote for Clinton or Trump in the recent primary elections.
The figures were calculated from statistics that were gathered by the U.S. Census Bureau, Federal Election Commission, Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, The Sentencing Project, and the Pew Research Center.
The figures illustrate that scores of people living in America are not allowed to vote, they are considered ineligible due to their age, prior arrests, or incomplete citizenship applications.
In total, there 103 million people who are essentially banned from voting, so this demographic would technically fall into the category of people who did not support Trump or Clinton in the primaries, although their actual preference can’t be determined.
Furthermore, there is an increasingly significant portion of the US population that is deciding not to vote on principle, because they don’t feel particularly enthusiastic about any of the candidates.
It was determined that 88 million people who were eligible to vote, did not vote in the primaries, and will not be voting in the general elections either. These are principled non-voters who have refused to put their consent into a system that they don’t believe is legitimate.
Of the Americans who do plan on voting in the main elections this November, most of them didn’t vote in the primary elections. According to the report in the Times, an additional 73 million did not vote in the primaries this year, but will most likely vote in the general election.
In total, roughly 60 million people voted in the primaries, with about 30 million voting for Republicans and another 30 million voting for Democrats. The funny thing about this, though, is the fact that most of these voters supported other candidates in the primaries since there was a wider group of politicians from which they can choose.
Although Clinton and Trump did finish in the lead, they only needed a very small percentage of eligible voters to win the nomination. When looking at the overall level of support that they have among the average American, that number is even smaller. Together, Clinton and Trump had the support of roughly 14% of eligible voters, and 9% of American residents in general.
This may seem strange, but this is actually the case in every single election. The vast majority of American residents do not vote, and thus it would be safe to assume that at least a significant portion of these nearly 200 million people would prefer to have no president at all.
John Vibes is an author and researcher who organizes a number of large events including the Free Your Mind Conference. He also has a publishing company where he offers a censorship free platform for both fiction and non-fiction writers. You can contact him and stay connected to his work at his Facebook page. You can purchase his books, or get your own book published at his website www.JohnVibes.com. John writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.
One more thing to add to my earlier post.
Conclusive studies have proven when a group or person abuses another and the abused not only allows it but makes excuses and comes back for more, this is a mental and emotional disorder called abuse syndrome, or the battered wife syndrome.
Many Americans have fallen into this disorder and are enabling abusive controllers within their government and perceived authority.
Both parties need help in their disorder but it is unlikely this will happen.
In fact, I’m quite certain it will become so bad it will crash on its own.
The Stockholm Syndrome applies too. Learned helplessness. Trauma and fear based control (shock doctrine). We get “the works” thanks to MK Ultra and centuries of elite rule honing their methods.
Another bulsh*t report. Tens of millions of us do want TRUMP. It’s more likely that 91% don’t want Hillary. The dems are hitting hard because they are afraid that a Trump victory will destroy decades of their work trying to bring America to its global knees. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT 2016. He’s our only choice and our last chance.
“Tens of millions of us do want TRUMP.”
I find that an odd proclamation. You’re the first openly-Trump supporter I’ve run across in a while. And could probably count on one hand those I’ve run across this election season. Online at least. And not counting potential trolls, since they could be anyone from any party.
But it still begs the question, Why not? Are they mostly just too illiterate to engage in honest discussion or reasonable debate?
I find your comment “odd”, perhaps naive. Apparently you believe the rigged polls and believe the lies of the mainstream media. Almost EVERYONE I’ve “run into” are smart enough to support Trump, especially over hillary, an obama II traitor or communist sanders. Perhaps you’re running into the wrong people. The fact is, once you remove the lies and false narrative from those who “discuss” hillary in a favorable light and the other fact that most of them are paid to do so, especially at rigged polls, they’ve got nothing whatsoever to say that is either “literate” or “honest,” Those who are politically savvy enough to support Trump do engage in literate and honest discussion and more than reasonable debate, In fact, 91% want TRUMP!
“I find your comment “odd”, perhaps naive. Apparently you believe the rigged polls and believe the lies of the mainstream media.”
Well seeing as except for my actually discounting the polls, I only entertained my opinion from my own personal experience. So I can see how that might seem odd if your intention is only to disagree with me by misconstruing, and/or reconstructing my words. And therefore the context of what I said.
Further I consider anyone voting status-quo/mainstream period as being the “wrong people”. Not sure what led you to assume that I must be supporting Clinton merely by virtue of my not supporting Trump…
The fact is that both wings of the corporate oligarchic political vulture duopoly only have “lies and false narrative”. And once you realize that, and if you vote your conscious, you will look elsewhere for a candidate. Something I’ve been doing since 1996.
Still you didn’t answer my underlying question. Where are all these millions of Trump supporters that I’m not running into? Not that I really care to. As I don’t particularly like most Clinton supporters, but I do run into them all the time. Unfortunately. And I’m speaking of my online experience where geography can be for the most part discounted as an influence; aka: “red state, blue state”?
And now I have another curious question, considering your odd insistence that 91% of some aggregate or demographic of americans support Trump. Actually it’s a combination question.
What is this “91%” you claim as Trump supporters? Is it the same 91% of all people whether they vote or not? Or just 91% of registered voters, etc. Or better yet can you just convert that into a rough number of voters? Is it the “millions” you originally claimed?
And secondly, seeing as how you seem to distrust polls and all, where do you get these magic number whereby you do trust the source?
Learn how to engage in discourse. There’s no way I would read your comments.
Are you kidding? What a double-standard. What am I doing differently from you? Other than being more accurate with respect to your comments then you are with mine.
Bottom line? The best way to avoid being exposed is to cry foul. Good job on that.
Thanks.
Yeah, I thought so.
I don’t believe it! 91% I do believe Hillary is NOT eligible to be president.
Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away
any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
If we don’t want elected leaders then many will be content with unelected “experts” (technocrats). Problem, reaction, solution. Could that be why it was last month The Atlantic touted Obama as the first president to rule using technocrats, one of his “two great legacies”? Last year MSNBC called Obama a “pragmatic technocrat”.
We have been given the ugliest election cycle ever for a reason.
Most legislation has already for years been written by the unelected technocrat. The average sheeple voter just doesn’t know it, or hasn’t the cognizant ability to connect the dots, since it’s not a well-kept secret by any means.
Exactly right, James Stone, with one big inflection point in the Carter administration when the Trilateralists fully captured the executive branch (the entire cabinet), which Rappaport has written about a few times. This is another lurch forward, dragging us towards China where the public no longer has an expectation of any input or rights to resist edicts, no matter what they are.
The difference is now the powers that shouldn’t be have the technology to implement their dystopian vision.
But are we already, and have been no better off democratically than the Chinese? Or merely marginally so? Just because we can still proclaim we have all these freedoms?
If we are still unable to work together, unopposed, for our global utopia, then what does it matter how little or more better off we are given to believe we are, in most respects only as consumers, from anyone else when it is all still contained within the confines of someone else’s agenda?
Like the 60-70 people who own more wealth than the bottom half of the global population. And therefore control the world…
We’ve had far more protected civil liberties and opportunities to create friction and roadblocks. Two of my former colleagues were MD PhDs originally from China and I was told many examples of the stark differences between the US and China. Even though their quality of life in China was better financially as specialists, they didn’t want to go back and were grateful their children could grow up relatively free in the US. This was also the view of several of their friends I got to know in the local academic network. It’s echoed in an article published last week in Financial Times (7/27/16) “Xi’s China: Smothering Dissent”. Very wealthy Chinese parents are sending their children to live in the west as the already brutal crackdown on dissent intensifies including the incarceration of human rights lawyers and advocates. It’s behind a paywall which you can get around if you locate the article through a Google search (using Financial Times and the title) and click on the provided link – btw this end run works with WSJ and other publications. Here’s the link I used, it may not work for you: https://next.ft (dot) com/content/ccd94b46-4db5-11e6-88c5-db83e98a590a Also, don’t forget China’s social credit scoring system. It really is much more Orwellian, dysfunctional, and draconian and will be our fate if we don’t get a critical mass to wake up and push back.
You seem to have more knowledge on this subject than me, so I won’t argue about it. I spent a year in Okinawa in 1969, and found the people there much more cultured than most of my fellow americans I knew. They also had quite the opposite opinion of amerika than your Chinese do.
But something occurred to me while reading your considered opinion. “Lesser Evil Immigration”
I completely understand, 4 years ago a friend of mine accepted a teaching position at a Saudi university after being laid off in the US. He was struck by how politely and respectfully he was treated wherever he went. Same with a geophysicist friend who briefly worked in Japan 15 years ago. Of course, despite the benefits of an old culture and the harmony of homogeneity, both cultures have some deep flaws too. China’s culture is even more materialistic than the US (hard to believe!), and with a totalitarian government already in place puppeteered by the apex global elite, it’s understandable why it was chosen to be the new large scale model technocracy and manufacturing powerhouse. What an “interesting” world. Thanks for the exchange, James. Regards, blue.
Read about GEMS, the system to rig the electronic voting machines that Hillary is counting on to steal the election,
I’m sure the screaming banshee will be the selected potus of the nwo gold collar scum crowd. (it’s rigged)
TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!
Make America great again.
I know it moral and ethical to abstain from evil. I have no moral, or ethical obligation in voting for a lesser of two evils. A vote in such case is a vote for evil. I prefer being moral and ethical, these are virtues I value. So, I choose to abstain from voting.
Further, I choose to not consent to authority foisted upon me by already entrenched so called authority. That too is evil. I’ve no moral, or ethical obligation being beheld by evil. No human being is qualified to be authority, all human beings are qualified only being their own individual authority. None are qualified to be authority over any other human beings, or any aspect of the cosmos.
“If one thinks of oneself as free, one is free, and if one thinks of
oneself as bound, one is bound. Here this saying is true, “Thinking
makes it so”.” — _Ashtavakra Gita_
“I think; therefore I am.” –Rene Descartes
“It is only prudent never to place complete confidence in that by which we have even once been deceived.” –Rene Descartes
“”Except our own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in our power.” –Rene Descartes